I wish I was playing in those games, just to see what
it would look like. In all of my games, the two big
neuts went opposite ways, fought each other, and noone
ever had or needed anything to do with either of them.
Just weren't there. Well, I did burn a couple Harad
pc's for my Corsairs ally in one game as SG, but I
just wanted to justify a navy that was never necessary.
Never seen them go the same way. Barely ever even seen
them play, heck, people talk of the Duns dropping a lot
I've seen more Corsairs and Harad drops than anything
else.
Don't think a restriction is possible. Neutral until
the player decides. Otherwise, make the game a 12-12
grudge for the rest of existence. You can argue for
Rhu and Duns too. Saw Cardolan knocked out turn 4 when
they both coordinated from the beginning. NOT FAIR!!!
Wah Wah. Leave as many options as possible. The whole
point of all the ideas (supposedly..) for changing the
game is to add complexity and realism or to at least
improve the mechanics of whichever aspect of game play
that the writer has focussed on. Removing individual
choice to pick a side?
Don't think so.
Regards,
Brad Brunet
···
On Sat, 03 March 2001, Mike Barber wrote:
In too many games, Harad and Corsairs go the same way
__________________________________________________________
Get your FREE personalized e-mail at http://www.canada.com